BenQ EW2420 Introduction

The EW2420 from BenQ is designed for use as a multi-purpose display. While it has the standard DVI and HDMI port you would expect on a current monitor, it also has an additional HDMI port for another video source like a video game system or Blu-ray player, as well as speakers for the audio from these sources. Of course, if the panel doesn’t perform well then it doesn’t matter how many inputs it has, but the BenQ looks promising with both a VA panel and an LED backlight.

Gallery: BenQ EW2420

Hardware Impressions

Out of the box, the mounting system for the BenQ was easy to install, but not very robust. It does have the ability to tilt the monitor, but lacks any swivel or height adjustment. There is a small clip for routing your cables through, but to fit a cable through you have to remove it and then reattach it. An HDMI cable or a headphone cable should fit through but it would have been far more useful had they allowed a way to slip a cable in there instead of needing to remove the whole clip to add one. There is an optional headphone holder for the top of the monitor included as well. If you wish to wall mount, or use a different mount than the included one, there is a standard 100mm x 100mm VESA mounting pattern on the back of the display.

The bezel around the display itself is a shiny black plastic, a look that I’m not a big fan of. To me the shiny edge of the screen just attracts fingerprints and can produce a distracting glare in bright lighting conditions, which a matte finish manages to avoid. The controls for the display are set to the right side of the screen and labeled with light gray text on the bezel.

BenQ EW2420
Video Inputs DVI-D, D-sub, 2x HDMI 1.3
Panel Type VA
Pixel Pitch 0.276 mm
Colors 16.7 Million
Brightness 250 nits (typical)
Contrast Ratio 3000:1 (typical)
Response Time 8 ms (GTG)
Viewable Size 24"
Resolution 1920x1080 at 60 Hz
Viewing Angle 178 degrees horizontal and vertical
Backlight LED
Power Consumption (operation) 53 watts (maximum)
Power Consumption (standby) Less than 1W
Screen Treatment Antiglare with hard-coating 3H
Height-Adjustable No
Tilt -5 degrees to +20 degrees
Pivot No
Swivel No
VESA Wall Mounting Yes: 100 mm x 100 mm
Dimensions w/ Base (WxHxD) 17.32" x 21.91" x 7.05"
Weight 11.24 lbs with stand
Additional Features USB 2.0 Hi-Speed Hub (1 upstream and 4 downstream ports)
2 x 1.5 watt speakers
Headphone and line-in jacks
Warranty 1-Year Limited
Accessories D-Sub cable
3.5mm audio cable
USB cable
Power cable
Manual and driver CD
Price Starting at $263 Online
$229 from BenQ after Coupon Code: ew2420oct$

 

OSD Menus
POST A COMMENT

47 Comments

View All Comments

  • cheinonen - Thursday, October 13, 2011 - link

    The SA750 is on hand and up for review soon, though probably behind a couple of other panels that are already here, one of which is TN. Reply
  • JMS3072 - Thursday, October 13, 2011 - link

    Can you speak to the volume of the headphone jack when using high-impedance (32Ω or greater) headphones? Reply
  • cheinonen - Thursday, October 13, 2011 - link

    I can't right now but I can try to hook them up tomorrow and give it a quick listen. The headphones I have on hand are 32 ohm (Grado SR60) or AKG K701s that are a huge pain to drive, and I'm certain it won't be able to do a decent job on at all. I will try with the Grado's and see how it does, though. I focused more on the speakers than on the headphone output. Reply
  • cheinonen - Friday, October 14, 2011 - link

    I got a chance to hook up my Grado SR60s to the BenQ, playing back a Blu-ray over HDMI. Even with the volume cranked all the way up it really wasn't that loud, much quieter than I would expect. If I had headphones that were hard to drive, I certainly wouldn't count on it putting out a decent volume level. Reply
  • ncomben - Thursday, October 13, 2011 - link

    What is it with all these 16:9 monitors - can we have at least have reviews of proper monitors for PC users who do more than just watch films or play console games?

    I believe the panel makers are doing the public a great injustice in the name of reducing costs and standardising across markets. I can almost understand reviewing below 24" at 16:9 since the headline resolution sounds better than a 16:10 screen much better but at 24", come on...

    I'm a developer and, I would argue that the 22" 1680x1050 monitors I am currently using are vastly superior to use than the newer tiny 22" 1920x1080 screens that my company buy for new developers.

    I use a 16x10 24" at home for gaming, development, films &, browsing and it's perfect.
    We recently got a 27" in the office to try out... it's going back because nobody could read the fonts!

    Then again, perhaps it's just me?
    Reply
  • cactusdog - Thursday, October 13, 2011 - link

    That makes no sense.....

    "I'm a developer and, I would argue that the 22" 1680x1050 monitors I am currently using are vastly superior to use than the newer tiny 22" 1920x1080 screens that my company buy for new developers."

    Absolutely no sense when you have less verticle resolution. I'm getting a bit sick of hearing this debate 16:10 vs 16:9, Sure, some people will prefer the extra verticle resolution of 1920x1200 vs 1920x1080 but the ratio argument fails if you prefer a 1680x1050 over a 1920x1080.

    Resolution matters, ratio does not. It makes no sense to prefer a smaller res just to get 16:10.

    And I agree about testing the SA750/SA950. They are very nice monitors and have better colour reproduction than mainstream IPS monitors.
    Reply
  • Rick83 - Thursday, October 13, 2011 - link

    The real problem isn't 16:10 or 16:9.
    the real problem is, that 4:3 and 5:4 are dead, especially in larger than 19 inch screens.
    I'm looking for an excellent 1600x1200 screen to get three of, and use them in portrait mode, but it's almost impossible, because the Eizo s2100k is apparently the only high quality display that's not costing an arm and two legs, while still offering reasonably thin bezels and usb-auto-calibration. Sadly, that screen hasn't seen a refresh for more than 6 years, and only old stock is being sold.

    At that size and resolution it's also unpractical to go for single displays, and even a good 30 incher is already more expensive - and also going the way of the dodo.

    Seems like screen real estate isn't that sought after anymore :(
    Reply
  • bobbozzo - Thursday, October 13, 2011 - link

    Dell is still selling their 20" model 2007 LCD which is 1600x1200, but it's $399, i.e. the same price as a Dell 1920x1200 24" IPS monitor. Reply
  • imaheadcase - Thursday, October 13, 2011 - link

    It does make sense in a personal experience aspect. Once you use a 24inch 1920x1200 using a x1080 just "feels" wrong. You fill ripped off. Games especially. It just feels the screen is tearing. Reply
  • kmmatney - Thursday, October 13, 2011 - link

    " I'm getting a bit sick of hearing this debate 16:10 vs 16:9, Sure, some people will prefer the extra verticle resolution of 1920x1200 vs 1920x1080 but the ratio argument fails if you prefer a 1680x1050 over a 1920x1080."

    Well, you going to keep hearing it - 16:9 sucks. I work in 1920 x 1200, but if I had a choice, I'd pick a 22" 1680 x 1050 screen over 1080p (for work). It makes sense if you spend all day trying to work with the 2 resolutions.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now